[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b78344a8-d753-4708-ac61-9c59ffdd5967@lunn.ch>
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2024 01:46:22 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Kory Maincent <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>
Cc: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Donald Hunter <donald.hunter@...il.com>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Kyle Swenson <kyle.swenson@....tech>,
Dent Project <dentproject@...uxfoundation.org>,
kernel@...gutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 10/12] net: pse-pd: Register regulator even for
undescribed PSE PIs
On Wed, Oct 02, 2024 at 06:28:06PM +0200, Kory Maincent wrote:
> From: Kory Maincent (Dent Project) <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>
>
> Ensure that regulators are registered for all PSE PIs, even those not
> explicitly described in the device tree. This change lays the
> groundwork for future support of regulator notifiers. Maintaining
> consistent ordering between the PSE PIs regulator table and the
> regulator notifier table will prevent added complexity in future
> implementations.
Does this change anything visible to the user?
Is it guaranteed that these unused regulators are disabled? Not that
they were before i guess. But now they exist, should we disable them?
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists